Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

3K...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think 72fps is a better first milestone for a Holy Grail. Offers more slow motion as well as more flexibility should you still need to extract 24fps from every 1/3 frame for normal speed. Then of course, 120fps and above next!

Michael
 
I sure hope its not a hardware limitation in the end and the the REDCODE processing can be done. So far they have been making progress and I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually figure it out. The sata connection should be able to handle that to RED DRIVE.
 
MichaelP said:
I think 72fps is a better first milestone for a Holy Grail. Offers more slow motion as well as more flexibility should you still need to extract 24fps from every 1/3 frame for normal speed. Then of course, 120fps and above next!

Michael
Click to expand...

Let's not get greedy! :)
 
MichaelP said:
I think 72fps is a better first milestone for a Holy Grail. Offers more slow motion as well as more flexibility should you still need to extract 24fps from every 1/3 frame for normal speed. Then of course, 120fps and above next!

Michael
Click to expand...

Not at the image quality of 2k windowed. It just doesn't seem to cut with 4k full frame. In my opinion. Plus I know that 4k will never see past 60fps.
 
Häakon said:
The point is that they *can* process that information - they just can't compress it to REDCODE fast enough.
Click to expand...

By process I meant actually scaling or compressing the 4K stream. This processing was bypassed when sent out the RAW port. It would essentially be a RAW dumping of data right off the sensor to be captured and/or processed by an external system.

I'm sure if RED could deliver some lower resolution scaled from the full sensor at full 60fps while maintaining the RAW data, they would. The scaling of 4K RAW to 2K RAW probably takes more internal processing power or clock cycles than they initially expected when they first decided to look into it. It may even take just as much or more CPU power to properly scale RAW data with good results than it does to compress to REDCODE. So by the time the camera scales that 4K frame down to 2K there's not enough clock cycles left to compress that 2K frame out to REDCODE. Hence, they have to run at lower fps ~ probably in the 24 to 30fps range or so. Which essentially negates the advantage to a 2K scaled mode other than longer record times in a mode that preserves the 35mm FOV. Better to just shoot 4K like Jim says.
 
I think the word "scaled" should be thrown out with the trash. It keeps coming up and up. Like Jim said. 4k 60fps is far more likely and I would rather have that anyway. Let's just hope there is still headroom in maximizing those processors.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
By process I meant actually scaling or compressing the 4K stream. This processing was bypassed when sent out the RAW port. It would essentially be a RAW dumping of data right off the sensor to be captured and/or processed by an external system.

I'm sure if RED could deliver some lower resolution scaled from the full sensor at full 60fps while maintaining the RAW data, they would. The scaling of 4K RAW to 2K RAW probably takes more internal processing power or clock cycles than they initially expected when they first decided to look into it. It may even take just as much or more CPU power to properly scale RAW data with good results than it does to compress to REDCODE. So by the time the camera scales that 4K frame down to 2K there's not enough clock cycles left to compress that 2K frame out to REDCODE. Hence, they have to run at lower fps ~ probably in the 24 to 30fps range or so. Which essentially negates the advantage to a 2K scaled mode other than longer record times in a mode that preserves the 35mm FOV. Better to just shoot 4K like Jim says.
Click to expand...

Jeff,

That's about what i think.
I will shoot 4K 24 fps, up to 30 for moderate slow motion, and 3K for 31 to 60 fps, ...3K. I mean, full 3K !!!!, that 's a ton of resolution for 60 fps.

It can't be much beter than that !!!

The reduced FOV should not be a problem at all for me.

hey...ALSO...4K to 3K...Not bad for fast telephoto euh ?

I can't see anything more flexible and creative than that, really.

Antoine
 
theres also the issue that Red hasn't confirmed they've found a way to scale 4K raw to 2K raw. They can scale 4K raw to 2K RGB but thats almost the same file size as 4K Raw and so defeats the objective.
 
darkline said:
theres also the issue that Red hasn't confirmed they've found a way to scale 4K raw to 2K raw. They can scale 4K raw to 2K RGB but thats almost the same file size as 4K Raw and so defeats the objective.
Click to expand...

I have confirmed that we will NOT scale 4K Raw to 2K Raw many times. Please drop 2K scaled from your thinking. It will not happen.

Jim
 
Jannard said:
Our job is to find ways to record more on less.
Click to expand...
Okay then in that respect can we ask you for a Techniscope option of 2.39:1 recorded directly? 4096 x 1706? If you windowed for 2.39 that would involve reading 1706 out of the 2300 lines used for 16:9, so 35% less data to scan and 35% less data to compress so does that mean we could see a 35% increase in scan rates? Meaning 4K TechniScope 2.39:1 @ 40fps using today's technology? In BUild 15?

Okay while I'm at it let me give you two more to consider and the first would be 3K 2.39:1. If the math holds up related to scan rates and percentages I think a lot of us would be dancing a jig if we had 3K TechniScope at 80fps.

The second thing would be for those who want scaled could we get pixel binning? Shouldn't a straight 2x2 pixel bin of the full sensor give us 2K scaled at 60fps right now?

Give us some more time and I'm sure we can do better.

Jim
Click to expand...

We're counting on it and we expect no less, I hope the ideas above give you some more ideas of what we might want to see. Thanks for continuing to improve by giving us surprises like 3K and heres to hoping that there will be more fun stuff like 2-perf 2.39:1 at faster frame rates!
 
Binning doesn't work if you're interested in quality. Scaling needs proper polyphase scaling filters. Binning means alias hell.

3k Gives a very good quality / resolution / fps mix.
 
The visual result will certainly be different, but I surely couldn't call it good or bad. 3k is an option. You can use or not use as you feel appropriate. I'd also remember the initial RED ONE spec didn't even have on-board RAW recording. All along we've been trying to improve or enhance the features as we see best. This is another example of that.

Graeme
 
I can't believe this whole conversation.

Don't mean to be rude, but really - the limitations of the technology and the basic facts about how the best can be got from it couldn't have been made clearer...
 
Some people here react like little children. You give them the little finger and they want the whole hand.

I think RED gives us great tools for their pricepoint. Think about it: we can record 3K @ 60 fps on board! This is awesome! And believe me, if it was technically possible, RED would implement 4K at 60 fps. It's not that they don't want to give us this option. It's technical limits.

So get a grip and be happy with your 3K @ 60 fps! That's still more than twice the resolution of most movies you see in theaters!

And thank RED for this great innovation! :usd:

All together now: Hip hip...
 
:)

You'll never win, Jim. Give them an inch and a quarter and they'll want an inch and three eights!

All this reminds me of when we were watching the first moon landing, nearly 40 years ago. All us teenage science nerds were glued to the screen in rapt silence, when this little old lady pipes up with: "It's not very clear, is it?"

A 1969 vidicon camera.
On the moon.
240,000 miles away.
And we're seeing it LIVE.
Through endless satellite and microwave links all the way from the receiver dish installations in outback Australia.
The lighting conditions: Broad daylight direct from the sun, no atmosphere to soften it. (When certain cinematographers die and go to Hell as they surely must, these are the lighting conditions they will be forever required to shoot under:sarcasm:)

I know she probably had approximately zero understanding of what was really going on, but somehow I think that even if they had something like the RED with them, she'd still find something to complain about:innocent:
 
pretty much what I thought. scaled is usless then
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Binning doesn't work if you're interested in quality. Scaling needs proper polyphase scaling filters. Binning means alias hell.
Click to expand...
Yeah I forgot that binning would play havoc with the bayer filter so it would be good for monochrome but not for color.

But what about the question of using 2.39:1 frame size to get faster frame rates?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top